IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7077 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI G.RAVINDRA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O LATE G.RAMAKRISHNA, ‘SAI KRUPA NILAYA’, CHITTARMAKKI ROAD, TALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT – 576 230.
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF:
NEAR RAJASHEKAR TEMPLE, GILLIYAR VILLAGE, KOTA, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT – 576 230. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NATARAJA BALLAL, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, SHO KOTA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.15/2019 OF KOTA POLICE STATION, UDUPI FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 449, 341, 323, 307, 324, 302, 120-B, 504, 506, 201, 212 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the Respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.8 in the charge-sheet filed by the Kota Police, Udupi in S.C.No.11/2019 on the file of the Principal and Additional District and Sessions Judge, Udupi, sitting at Kundapura for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 341, 302, 307, 302, 120B, 109, 112, 201, 212 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C.
3. The charge-sheet papers reveals that on 26.01.2019, a person by name Lohith Poojari lodged a complaint stating that there was some dispute with regard to the digging of mud for the purpose of constructing a lavatory in the land of complainant by accused No.1 Rajashekar Reddy. In this context, there was some verbal altercation between the complainant and accused No.1/Rajashekar Reddy and the said accused No.1 had shown his audacity to the complainant stating that the complainant can do whatever he want. In this background, it is alleged that on 26.01.2019 at about 10.15 p.m., when the complainant was proceeding on his Scooty along with his brother Rakshith Poojary towards his house and when he reached near Kota Iyengar Bakery, he observed a Maruti Swift Car and a motor cycle following them. When the complainant reached his house along with his brother and parked his vehicle near his house, he observed a person coming on the motor cycle behind them was one Mr.Sujaya, who is his neighbour. After sometime, he also observed the Swift Car which followed the complainant was parked on the road opposite to his house and two persons were sitting in the said Car and two others were sitting on two motor-bikes and were making huge sound by raising engines of the vehicles and by horning. It is stated that on same day, the complainant along with his friends Bharath, Yathisha, Umesha, Nagaraja, Manisha, Prasada and Shashi came to his house. When the complainant came out of his house and was narrating the entire incident to his friend Bharath, accused Nos.1 and 2 along with four other persons came there with Talwars and choppers and assaulted Bharath on his neck, head and also on his hands. When the complainant and Yathish went to rescue Bharath, the accused persons also assaulted them and other witnesses. Due to screaming of the complainant and others, public started coming to the spot and on seeing them, the accused persons ran away from the said spot. Bharath and Yathish had sustained severe injuries and were shifted to the hospital, later, those two persons succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of the said complaint, the Police have investigated the matter and found that some more persons were also involved in the said incident including the petitioner herein.
4. In the charge-sheet, the role which has been assigned to the petitioner herein is that he was also present at that particular point of time and assaulted a witness by name Shashikumara who went to prevent the accused persons from assaulting Bharath and deceased Yathish.
5. During the course of investigation, the Police have also conducted the Test Identification Parade and the witnesses have also identified the accused persons.
The Police have got the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out from the statement of the complainant himself. He never stated about the presence of the petitioner/accused sitting with some more persons but specifically implicated accused Nos.1 and 2. Likewise, one Mr.Rakshith has also been examined. He had also not stated about the specific overt-acts of this petitioner. The allegations that this petitioner has assaulted one Shashikumara who was also an injured eye-witness present at the time, his statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. He has not named this petitioner but has stated that some person who was having a small white moustache and beard has assaulted the deceased persons and the petitioner herein has not assaulted the deceased.
7. Considering the above said circumstances, when at the initial stage, the participation of the petitioner has not been stated even sitting with some more persons. But specifically sitting with the other accused persons and assaulted the deceased is not forthcoming. The participation and overt-acts of this petitioner, common intention or common object has to be established during the course of full-fledged trial. In the above said facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the nature of allegations and the role assigned to the petitioner, in my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail in S.C.No.11/2019 on the file of Principal and C/c. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kundapura, Udupi District, for the alleged offences, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE DH